Are Humans Inherently Selfish?
- Thread starter Ameatypie
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I believe everyone has the ability to be selfish.. but everyone has the ability to be selfless.
Heres some examples I have seen:
1. Look in Australia on Good Friday: We hold a massive fundraiser every year to provide funds for sick and needy children in out health system: Volunteers (like myself) walk the streets of the country, shaking tins and accepting money out of anyone willing to even get rid of some of the useless shrapnel change from their pockets... someone today even handed me 200 dollars on the spot, without getting anything in return, and said "I may never get a return on this, but I'm happy to help those poor children".
2. Well, hey, lets look at volunteers in general, feeding the homeless, doing Emergency jobs (at least in Australia) for free, chopping trees, pulling people out of cars, generally helping others for nothing. The only benefits they get are a pat on the back (which, to be frank, we rarely get
).
3. Friends can also be selfless. I mean, sure some aren't, and sometimes friends have a give, take aspect to it, but, an example of mine, is of friends helping each other for no mutual gain, beyond helping a friend.
I mean, as I said at the start, I know lots of people can be selfish... hell, I've even been selfish, many-a-times infact, but not everyone is looking for No.1 in every situation.
Heres some examples I have seen:
1. Look in Australia on Good Friday: We hold a massive fundraiser every year to provide funds for sick and needy children in out health system: Volunteers (like myself) walk the streets of the country, shaking tins and accepting money out of anyone willing to even get rid of some of the useless shrapnel change from their pockets... someone today even handed me 200 dollars on the spot, without getting anything in return, and said "I may never get a return on this, but I'm happy to help those poor children".
2. Well, hey, lets look at volunteers in general, feeding the homeless, doing Emergency jobs (at least in Australia) for free, chopping trees, pulling people out of cars, generally helping others for nothing. The only benefits they get are a pat on the back (which, to be frank, we rarely get
).3. Friends can also be selfless. I mean, sure some aren't, and sometimes friends have a give, take aspect to it, but, an example of mine, is of friends helping each other for no mutual gain, beyond helping a friend.
I mean, as I said at the start, I know lots of people can be selfish... hell, I've even been selfish, many-a-times infact, but not everyone is looking for No.1 in every situation.
Actually, you might find it kind of hilarious, but I might call you a certain type of atheistic Satanist [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism]. Don't take it the wrong way, it doesn't have anything to do with devil worshipping or anything, it's just a school of thought. Quite an interesting read, I think, especially if you're pondering about selfishness.ameatypie said:
I've pondered it myself, and I'm still not sure whether it's a yes or a no.
For example, if I were to give my imaginary girlfriend a gift, do I give it to her to make her happy, or is it because I want to see her happy? Of course in an every day life, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference, but the question is, am I doing it for her, or am I ultimately doing it for myself?
I can't decide.
If by selfish, you mean that humans seek the most possible gain from any action, then you are right; humans are selfish. People like when they get what they want. When a person performs an action which leads to some perceived gain, the brain releases a chemical cocktail meant to reinforce said action. Over time, the brain forms a network of actions and responses metaphorically hot-keyed to the reward sensation. Based on the relative strengths of the connections, the brain calculates their values, and rationalizes its evaluation based on some perceived moral foundation. Where it gets hazy is that perception is subjective. For example, two men are confronted with a situation where they must chose between saving their immediate families or saving a large portion of their community. Their brains evaluate the situation and, upon realizing that they can only save one group, assign values to the importance of both groups. Further compounding the issue, however, is the assumed perception by the men's peer group of their hypothetical actions. Even if they assign a greater importance to their family, the men may fear retribution by the peer group for failure to put its interests before their own. I one man chooses family, and the other friends, it could be said that the first man put more value on the expected praise from their family, while the other thought that acceptance by the peer group was more valuable. Both men, however, were looking out for themselves.
ameatypie said:
Yes.
No.
When most people read and believe "all people are selfish" I don't really think they understand where that phrase actually comes from. It's true, but it's meant to convey that the species is what's selfish. Individuals are capable of great selflessness if they believe it's good for the species.
Are some people more selfish than others? I am sure. Does everyone do things for selfish motives all the time like suggested by some here? No. Do you save your child from being hit by a car, getting hit yourself, for selfish motives? I can tell you now that we are made to do these sorts of things. There's no thought involved in the slightest. You just do. It's neither selfish or selfless. You do this by a biological imperative that puts the species before ourselves.
And there's a whole bunch of military personel, police, etc that have put themselves directly in harm's way not because they want to be heroes but because they believe in a cause greater than themselves. Long and hard thought, still putting themselves in danger.
Others end up putting their person in peril of one sort or another because of a conscience. Some have done something, gotten away with it, no-one knows anything, but they are driven to own up by a guilty conscience. This cannot be explained away by self-interest.
Selfishness certainly exists and we are all capable of being selfish to varying degrees.
But it's far from the only thing driving us.
I guess, to summarize, the point of my entire post is that the fundamental human motivation is to keep the hormones flowing; to keep feeling good. On an only tangentially related note, is that maybe why junkies find it so hard to quit? They essentially have to deny a source of automatic positive reinforcement, which is tied to their fundamental motivation in life.
Didn't read any of this.ameatypie said:
Yes every action is done to support your own reasoning/is selfish. Its not a bad thing though, you can use it as an excuse to be cynical but really its just logical. We live life through our own perspective and no one elses, how can we truly justify doing something without thinking of ourselves?
You can find a selfish and selfless reason for every action, but only the individual who took the course of action will truly know which reason they used to decide. I'm a fairly selfless person, but I'll never convince those who don't want to believe it, which is good because I really don't care to.
Actually other actions too exist, you may be doing something that's putting you at a worse disposition, however you will be doing this to validate your own ego. From my perspective that makes it still selfish, jumping onto the grenade for example was an example of self validation. (or perhaps less likely, a blatantly selfish deed)Kortney said:
I suppose I wouldn't say all acts are selfish, rather I would say that no act is selfless.
Give an example, while I don't know you I believe my reasoning leaves no gaps for any premeditated act. Why do people always think selfishness is such a horrible thing?Jedoro said:
I was sitting in a nearly full lecture room and two girls who were friends could not find a place to sit as there were only single seats available and as a result sat on the stairs of the lecture hall. Because I noticed this I told the guy next to me to move over a seat (as stated before, there were few single seats available) and moved over to look for another place to sit, letting them both sit together. You can talk all you want about how insignificant a gesture it is, but its because of its insignificance that it becomes somewhat meaningful. I had no obligation to move chairs, it wasn't expected of me either and it put me at quite an awkward (for me) position. I did it to validate my own logic and empathy. There was no reason for them to be chairless when there were chairs to be had and I knew I wouldn't enjoy that position.
So you just posted a comment which is trying to convince people of the fact that you are a selfless, unassuming person, but which also attempts to convince us of the fact that you really don't want to convince us of anything at all? Any corroborating evidence for your arguments? And which one are you actually supporting, anyway?Jedoro said:
I'm not trying to convince you of nothing, I'm trying to convince you that you won't really know if someone is selfish or selfless. You can find all the reasons you want and even ask them directly, but given that they have the capacity to lie, you can't ever be sure.virsconte said:
The same thought has passed me before. I agree. All animal actions are inherrently selfish as they all benefit us in some way. This isn't necessarily a bad thing however. Only when we chose our own well being over the well being of others (eg. killing someone so you can live) does it become so.
Soo...you are trying to convince us that it is pointless to search for answers, because we will never be sure if the ones we arrive at are the real ones? I say we, by the way, not out of some sense of arrogance towards you, but because it seems that most of the people on this thread seem interested in searching regardless of the results. Even the act of searching can reveal answers to questions unasked.Jedoro said:
Either way, though, you are correct in that from an objective perspective answers are completely useless. All meaning is meaningless (?) out of context. In this case a human one.
Being nice doesn't nice doesn't always make you feel good. Often a good deed may make you annoyed or hurt. If I were to retrieve a watch on top of a big pile of sharp things and gave it back to some snobbish person I have no intention of talking to(purely an example), then what would I gain? I didn't talk to them so I get no thanks, I'm hurt and I don't particularly like the person I helped so I get no fuzzy feelings and I'm not trying to get something from that person. I get nothing but pain from walking on sharp things (I'm normal so I don't get any pleasure form my own harm). Being in pain the thoughts resulting from that in my head would be," Ampersand you f*****g idiot, don't ever walk on a pile of sharp things again."So I don't even recognize my self as nice, I recognize my self as an idiot, so I don't have any self gratification.ameatypie said:
I admit that this type of situation is a bit uncommon compared to being nice for the sake of yourself but as you asked whether everything we do is selfish, my point still remains.
EDIT:Actually I'll change my answer for" Are humans inherently selfish" from "Yes" to "All Humans have the capability for selfishness". Once every blue moon you'll get someone completely selfless. Unfortunately, they tend not to last long.
I think you have a misunderstanding of the concept of selfishness. A person can easily say someone is motivated by greed, but that goes both ways; a person can just as easily say someone is motivated by kindness.ameatypie said:
Let's see if we can find a criteriea; a selfish person, by definition, wants things. By that logic (and by personal expirience) I think it's fair to say a selfish person would be hesitant to risk anything themselves. Remember that; hesitant. A selfish person (again, in my expirience) hesitate before they do anything, especially if it involves risking things. They'll do just enough to get something done, maybe not even that much.
That doesn't answer your question, though, does it? Problem is, I don't think I have an answer. I could see both sides of the argument, and I'm not sure which side to take; ideally, humans are compassionate and caring things, but realistically, a lot of bad things happen because someone wants something for the sake of having something.
Apologies Abound
This in of itself represents a non-objective viewpoint. Saying that an action is inherently good or bad entails some concrete absolute regarding good and evil, which are by their very natures abstract and subjective.A Pious Cultist said:
Good and evil are constructs of the mind meant to rationalize a given action, or condemn it. They exist only as a framework, or even just a sorting algorithm to classify input for later retrieval.
i think if people act on instinct or as a reflex then its not selfish due to the fact you dont really think about it but its a bit harder to say weather an action that is thought out is always selfish or not
